Bill O'Reily challenges scientest to explain how moon got there...

[Bill Thompson]

Isn't he supposed to be a political pundit?
What might be even more stupid is the fact that he got roped into this at all.

 

[Perpetual Student]

These comments by O'Reily are like those of a child. He cannot be that stupid!

 

[dudalb]

Isn't he supposed to be a political pundit?
What might be even more stupid is the fact that he got roped into this at all.

He saw how well Glenn Beck is doing with this sort of crap and decided to try to grab some of the pie for himself.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

which God? Spinoza's God? Athiests use the biblical god, but that is a strawman argument. "godless universe" makes about as much sense to some as "natureless nature"

So... Your definition of "God" is "the Universe"?



Well, that's useful.

 

[Kid Eager]

which God? Spinoza's God? Athiests use the biblical god, but that is a strawman argument. "godless universe" makes about as much sense to some as "natureless nature"

.... and that similie makes about as much sense as spoonless giraffes (who may or may not be eating straw).

 

[Dorian Gray]

I actually watched the little video with Bill in it. Taken out of context, his remark seems stupid. OK, so Bill never learned that science pretty much knows where the moon came from. But I think (I hope) his point is that it is an endless argument. You can go on and on about one thing came from something else and there is no end. He is not really a scientist so he can't put this point using the right words. The fact is, our whole solar system came from dust from an exploded star. So, when Bill is told that he will reply "where did that come from?" and when you eventually get to the Big Bang, he might reply "how did that happen? How does existance itself exist?" and eventually we fall off the map of scientific knowledge completely. I believe this is what he means. So he does not know that we know where the moon came from. If you fault him for being uneducated, you will eventualy fault everyone.

That was the dumbest apologist argument I've ever read.

At least he didn't ask how magnets work.

 

[tsig]

which God? Spinoza's God? Athiests use the biblical god, but that is a strawman argument. "godless universe" makes about as much sense to some as "natureless nature"

Then the question is where did god come from?

 

[fuelair]

He is just as much a dumbass as those who choose to take his remark out of context and miss his point.

What point Bill? And how is his remark out of context? In what context is that not a beyond ignorant (no, stupid, ignorant can be fixed)point/request/question for a theoretically educated adult in the USA in the 21st Century?

 

[steve s]

BillO seems to think that he's the smartest person on earth and knows everything. Therefore if there's anything that he doesn't know, the only possible answer is that god did it.

Steve S

 

[sgtbaker]

Are you sure this guy isn't an undercover skeptic atheist?

I was thinking the same thing. Clearly, he must be a plant.

 

[Puppycow]

Remember when he said scientists couldn't explain the tides either?

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-co...-proves-god-s-existence---neil-degrasse-tyson

 

[Puppycow]

******* magnets. How do they work?

 

[tyr_13]

The moon is a third the size of the Earth, correct? So is it really a moon, or are we a dual-planet system?

See Bill, there is no moon. Only our sister planet, Luna.

 

[Roboramma]

The moon is a third the size of the Earth, correct? So is it really a moon, or are we a dual-planet system?

See Bill, there is no moon. Only our sister planet, Luna.

Not quite:

The Moon is Earth's only natural satellite and the fifth largest satellite in the Solar System. It is the second largest natural satellite in the Solar System relative to the size of its primary (after Charon, which orbits dwarf planet Pluto), a quarter the diameter of Earth and 1/81 its mass.

 

[MG1962]

But Robo The Earth and Moon orbit a common point of gravity so indeed they should be considered a twin planet - Now the decison to demote Pluto comes back to haunt, because Earth has not cleared its orbit of sufficent mass

And for the record - give Bill a couple of gummy bears and send him on his way

 

[MattusMaximus]

So... Your definition of "God" is "the Universe"?

Well, that's useful.

It is if you're a pantheist.

 

[Roboramma]

So... Your definition of "God" is "the Universe"?



Well, that's useful.

And now Bill O's question really makes sense: "Who put the moon there?" Answer: "The universe!"

Wow, what a revelation. Never mind understanding the processes and forces involved, never mind the historical question of how it happened in this particular case, never mind the physics, astrophysics, chemistry, etc. The answer which basically boils down to "it's there" is enough, and anyone who suggests that there is more to learn is... denying a fundamental truth about the universe?
Somehow, though, even this doesn't seem to be Bill O's point of view. We all agree that the universe exists, after all. Yes, the existence of the moon shows that the universe exists, but it doesn't answer the question: is there a teleological explanation behind exist existence? Did something intend for it to be there? The moon, alas, is silent on that point.

 

[Roboramma]

But Robo The Earth and Moon orbit a common point of gravity so indeed they should be considered a twin planet

I don't see how that follows: it would be true even if the moon were a twentieth it's current mass. That's just how gravity works.

 

[nvidiot]

That common cog is inside the Earth though isn't it?

 

[Bill Thompson]

So... Your definition of "God" is "the Universe"?



Well, that's useful.

That is not what I said. Strawman arguement again.

You are forgetting the multiverse.

The last time I got roped into this kind of online discussion, the guy kept misquoting and misunderstanding what I was saying. I wasted a lot of time on some kid who thought his GED leveled the playing field. No one is worth my time going through all that again. So let me just say I congratulate you in knowing that God is not an invisible man in the sky. Did you figure that out all by yourself or did someone teach you? I am not here to educate you. I noticed you did not even bother looking up Spinoza before leaping to your keyboard to reply to me. God is that which no greater can be thought. The paintings in the sistine chapel might as well be Santa Claus.

Isn't this discussion thread about Bill O'? So start a new discussion thread and wait there for me to decide if I want to join you.